Re: [Linux-mips-kernel] Whole tree or no whole tree.

[Pete P. <pp...@mv...>]

Paul Mundt wrote:

>On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 12:30:22PM -0700, James Simmons wrote:
>
>>Okay I see some people are not happy with the drop down tree idea. I know
>>not to many people with the idea but I'm willing to put it to a veto for
>>what to do. If you want me to place a whole tree in CVS then I will.  
>>
>
>Putting a whole tree in CVS will make it a maintenance nightmare, and take
>away from real development time. If certain items (like pcmcia) need to be
>added into the tree, they should be added in as they're needed.
>
>Importing an entire tree so development can be done on some small part of
>the tree seems kind of wasteful. If patches for the small parts (outside of
>the MIPS portion of the kernel, such as drivers) are necessary, then it'd
>be more beneficial to try and get them pushed into Linus' tree then worry
>about dragging them around in our tree..
>

Sending new drivers, whether pcmcia or network or any other driver, to 
Alan Cox or Linus probably makes the most sense. However, the problem 
then is that the linux-mips tree will hardly ever be bleeding edge and 
up to date with any given board. For example, I'm doing work on a system 
on a chip which includes quite a few peripherals. Even though these 
periperals are "mips specific", since they are part of this mips soc, it 
still make sense to put their drivers in the appropriate directory -- 
like drivers/net driver/pcmcia, etc. If I only push those new drivers to 
Alan or Linus, then the linux-mips tree will have to wait until these 
drivers are a) accepted and b) we pull down the changes from the stock 
kernel.  Thus, at any given time the linux-mips tree will not have all 
the bleeding edge code that developers might/will be interested in.


Pete